Right. I'm much more interested in Religious Studies than in philosophy of religion, at least as far as this paper goes.
One bottom line for me is that a religion is made of practices. Practices are first and foremost. The practices that constitute
a religion are rationalized by beliefs according to which... etc. but the religion is a system of practices. Belief in a supermundane reality is essential
but secondary. On my account, if nothing we could do constitutes the practice of
the religion, there is no religion--no matter what we believe.

For me religion is centrally something people do (or can do).
This actually facilitates its study. I'm also interested in discerning the difference tween religious practice and
non-religious practice, as most of what we (in the West anyhow) do, is non-religious--even if we are religious.
What makes religious practice religious? How do we tell which are which? is some of the questions I address.